InsideClimate News: In Trump, U.S. Puts a Climate Denier in Its Highest Office and All Climate Change Action in Limbo

Guest post by David Middleton

This is the best election aftermath I have ever seen… and I’ve been voting since 1977.  This even tops 1980…

In Trump, U.S. Puts a Climate Denier in Its Highest Office and All Climate Change Action in Limbo

His anti-regulatory stances, support of unfettered fossil fuel production, and his threat to pull the U.S. out of the Paris agreement, send ripple effects worldwide.

BY MARIANNE LAVELLE, INSIDECLIMATE NEWS
NOV 9, 2016

Donald Trump’s astonishing victory has turned the world of climate action upside down, setting back U.S. environmental policy and threatening the international drive to cut carbon pollution and slow global warming.

The stunning upset by Trump, who has routinely suggested that climate change is a hoax, threatens to unravel President Obama’s climate action agenda, built on executive orders and regulations, including the Environmental Protection Agency’s carbon clampdown at power plants. Trump has vowed to “cancel” the Paris climate agreement, but could cripple it by merely retreating from the U.S. commitment. As the world’s second-biggest emitter of carbon dioxide pollution, the U.S. could render the global treaty meaningless, at a time when scientists are urging nations to quickly raise their ambition, or risk an escalating climate crisis.

[…]

In another disappointing outcome for climate advocates, Republicans maintained their control of the Senate, winning eight of 11 key races, as well as keeping their majority in the House of Representatives. Both chambers are strongly opposed to climate action policies.

The nation’s climate leaders were left stunned, somber, angry and reflective. They had already prepped their wish lists for Clinton that included a massive clean energy spending program, a moratorium on fossil fuel leases on federal lands and other rules…

[…]

Now, with little chance to have their agenda heard in Washington, environmental groups will be forced to play defense. At first, that will mean an effort to block Trump’s plans, perhaps by convincing Senate Democrats to block appointments or use the filibuster. Legal challenges are another avenue, but Trump will be able to quickly make his mark on the judiciary, with his appointment of a Supreme Court justice.

Trump has signaled plans to populate his cabinet with oil industry executives and allies, to eliminate the EPA, and to cut all federal spending on the United Nations climate process. Trump has claimed that he will save $100 billion over eight years, which appears to be based on a plan to end federal funding for solar and wind energy, efficiency, batteries, clean cars and climate science, wrote Joe Romm, a former Energy Department official and founder of the Center for American Progress’ Climate Progress blog.

Basically, Trump has promised an America-first, drill-baby-drill energy policy. He has promised unfettered production of coal, oil and natural gas and to “bring the coal industry back 100 percent.”

Trump said he will rescind any regulations that unduly burden energy development, including the Clean Power Plan, which, if it survives legal challenges, was to have been the cornerstone of Obama’s climate action legacy and the main policy for realizing the nation’s Paris goals.

[…]

Jeff Holmstead, a lawyer who represents coal-burning utilities and who spent four years as an assistant administrator in the EPA under President George W. Bush, said that if the courts don’t kill the Clean Power Plan, Trump will have a number of other options. “I think it’s certain the Clean Power Plan will be revoked,” he said this morning. “The only question is how.”

For his energy and environmental policy team, Trump has selected one of the nation’s most prominent climate contrarians, Myron Ebell of the Competitive Enterprise Institute, to head his EPA transition. Ebell worked on policy for the tobacco industry before his years of work opposing environmental regulations and sowing doubt on climate science. Trump is also reported to be considering Harold Hamm, chief executive of fracking industry leader Continental Resources, for energy secretary, and Forrest Lucas, co-founder of oil products company Lucas Oil, for interior secretary.

[…]

Trump will be the only world leader who rejects [junk] science, according to a study by the Sierra Club. This is a particularly tough pill for climate activists to swallow.

[…]

Seven of the eight Koch-backed Senate candidates were victorious; the network’s only loss was to Masto. The Koch brothers’ effort was bolstered by massive spending by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and other conservative and anti-regulatory organizations, including the National Rifle Association.

InsideClimate News reporter Zahra Hirji contributed reporting.

Notes to Zahra Hirji:

President-elect Donald Trump is not a “climate denier.”  He has never denied the climate.  To my knowledge, no AGW skeptic has ever denied the climate.  As a professional geologist with a fairly good working knowledge of the English language, I am fairly certain that it is both scientifically and linguistically impossible to deny the climate.

“President Obama’s climate action agenda, built on executive orders and regulations” was designed to be unraveled because he did it all with a “pen and a phone,” rather than through legislation.  Anyone with an eraser and white-out can “unravel” it.

4_172016_b1-babb-obama-erase8201

“Trump has vowed to ‘cancel’ the Paris climate agreement, but could cripple it by merely retreating from the U.S. commitment.” Well, d’uh!  Since the Paris climate agreement was not submitted to the Senate for ratification as a treaty or enabled by legislation from Congress, it is nothing more than an agreement between outgoing President Obama and the other signatories.  In 70 days or so, it will be null & void.

“Republicans maintained their control of the Senate, winning eight of 11 key races, as well as keeping their majority in the House of Representatives” because the voters voted for them.  This ought to be a clue as to the opinion of the majority of the voters regarding “climate change action.”

“Trump has signaled plans to populate his cabinet with oil industry executives and allies, to eliminate the EPA, and to cut all federal spending on the United Nations climate process” and he still won the election by a rather wide margin (only the Electoral Vote matters, it says so in the Constitution).

“For his energy and environmental policy team, Trump has selected one of the nation’s most prominent climate contrarians, Myron Ebell of the Competitive Enterprise Institute, to head his EPA transition. Ebell worked on policy for the tobacco industry before his years of work opposing environmental regulations and sowing doubt on climate science. Trump is also reported to be considering Harold Hamm, chief executive of fracking industry leader Continental Resources, for energy secretary, and Forrest Lucas, co-founder of oil products company Lucas Oil, for interior secretary.”  To which I say…

 

 

Advertisements

404 thoughts on “InsideClimate News: In Trump, U.S. Puts a Climate Denier in Its Highest Office and All Climate Change Action in Limbo

  1. Please Have them investigate the entire thing under the RICO act and further enforce that it is indeed a SCAM.

    • We are talking about TWO distinct sets of investigations here – one into the misinformation on the science side (ClimateGate / NOAA temps doctoring, EPA shenanigans, etc), and the other concerning NGO / mainstream media efforts to push a 20-year meme about ‘industry corrupted skeptic climate scientists.’

      “Greenpeace: The roots of Climate Smear” https://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/02/26/the-origin-of-climate-smear/
      “The epicenter for the ‘Industry-corrupted Skeptic Climate Scientists’ Accusation” http://gelbspanfiles.com/?p=4482

    • Don’t bet on PE Trump cleaning the slate.
      The Republicans lost some ground in both the House and the Senate, and they were already do nothing woosies. And you still have all the big money bag watermelons paying off people everywhere.
      But at least we might expect some common sense to prevail.
      California is a totally lost cause; well the whole Pacific coast.
      I am getting nauseated by all the inebriates who are clamoring from Hillary to sue because she won the popular vote.

      There ISN’T any popular vote. The Sovereign States elect the President, and they each get one vote. They are weighted by the number of House seats each State has based on their population, but each State can cast their Electoral College votes any way their State laws or Constitutions permit.
      Hillary apparently got 60 some odd percent of California votes. But California gave 100% of its electoral college tickets to Hillary and none to anybody else. They could have split it 60:40 Clinton:Trump if the State chose to do that. If ALL States did that, then the “popular vote” winner would also win the electoral college vote and become PE.
      Think of the mess if the citizens of the world elected the personnel in the UN.

      The US is a Federation of States, and those States pick the head of the Federation to run those things appropriate for the Federation to do, like National Defence. I think they are supposed to do something else, but at the moment I have forgotten what that was.

      So all of the misfits are packing up to leave; mostly going to Canada; good luck with them, Canada.

      Can you believe that Ruth Bader Ginsburg of the SCOTUS said she was moving to New Zealand.

      Sorry Ruthie, but you have to have some marketable skills to get an immigration visa for NZ. You have none.

      G

      • ne may wonder if we had voter ID what the tally of the popular vote might be. I suggest he DemoncRat tally would be very much lower. Temperatures are not the only variable subject to modification.

      • George we really don’t want them in Canada. Venezuela would be fine with me, that country could use some airheads on top of the rear ends they have ( and the airhead’s money). As far as ruthy is concerned, thanks for the laugh and I doubt she’d survive the flight.

      • Hey! We have enough loonies in Canada already, starting with that Trudeau fellow! And Wynne who has already destroyed our Ontario electrical system. We don’t need any more. Send ’em to Australia or something :)

      • Venezuela or North Korea. I have nothing against Australians, and come to think of it, it would be cruel to impose more idiots on Venezuela or North Korea. An uninhabited arctic island?

      • Re Shawn Marshall – the popular vote might not be finally tallied as yet

        “pat
        November 10, 2016 at 11:47 pm · Reply

        just as MSM unnecessarily delayed allocating 270 electoral votes to Trump on Election night, probably hoping to stop Trump making a Victory speech (which, for legal reasons, it was in his interest to do that night), there has also been the ridiculous slowness in updating the count, allowing the MSM to make hay out of Clinton winning the popular vote. it’s been a huge meme amongst the orchestrated, & often violent, protestors:

        but now they admit, after all the headlines, and violence:

        RedditThe_Donald: Hey /all, Hillary has NOT won the popular vote. There are still roughly 14 million votes left to be counted and even CNN is projecting Trump will win the popular vote.

        CNN: Presidential Election Results
        CLICK TAB FOR “POPULAR VOTE”
        PROJECTED WINNER: TRUMP
        http://edition.cnn.com/election/results/president

        Comment #33 at http://joannenova.com.au/2016/11/trump-victory-the-beginning-of-the-end-of-global-climate-scare/#comment-1855441

      • That’s precisely why I want to know. I think this is more of the political hatchet jobs in play than anything else. Really pisses me off how the liberals create violence and hatred, while projecting the hate on the people they offend!!!

      • If the Arctic is warming so much why not send them to Wrangle Island where during 1913-1916 the Canadian expedition got trapped by ice and lost their ship.

      • Relax…I am here to tell you that not a one of them is going to make good on their promise.
        Self-important narcissism is a very peculiar thing.

      • Everyone underestimates The Donald, and what he is capable of. Even now. George, I suggest you refrain from trying to predict what he will be able to do. Because most who try such an endeavor end up proven wrong. Amazed at what he has accomplished so far? You ain’t seen nothin’ yet.

      • ” Send ’em to Australia or something”

        Hey, no !!!! We don’t want the worthless mouths. We already have too many illegal immigrants.

      • YOu might want to do a mercy immigration for Madonna. She promised BJs for all Clinton voters, and based on the results, that is about 25 million (given only declared gender)

    • I am a climate scientist. I grew up in Caiifornia I saw the ravages of catastrophic anthropogenic climate change. I have lots in Notrhwest Territories you need to buy NOW. I have lots of clients, AlGore, Leo, and other celebs, who have moved here.Right now they’re wearing fur and down oats in January, but they know that in 10 years, they’re going to be wearing shorts and tank tops up here. Like Leo just told me the other day, “I’ve sworn off private jets, dogsleds are my main transportation now.

  2. But, but … I only thought elections matter when they support my side. ;-)

    The election proves that everyone has a BS limit. The government, under Obama, obviously exceeded the BS limit of enough voters to get Trump elected. Time will tell if it is a good thing.

  3. There was the apathy vote, which Clinton had, and there was the anger vote, which Trump had. That’s why the polls were so far off.

    • The polls actually captured Clinton’s support fairly well. Her popular vote percentage fell very close to the mean of 4-way race surveys. Trump’s popular vote percentage was 5.5% higher than the mean of 4-way race surveys. It barely fell within the margin of error of one survey, IBD/TIPP.

      • The pollsters failed to predict accurate turnout levels as well. Both party levels were down. 16% lower than bush/kerry. Trump/ Conway predicted very well that Pennsylvania would flip and that Florida (due to the Cuban issue) would be in play. Conway is a genius. Trump accurately assessed white middle class anger about immigration, trade and jobs. Where? WI, MI,MN,OH,PA… the old rust belt.

      • You could argue that Clinton’s popular vote lead is explained by just California, but I would add Washington and Oregon into the mix as well.

      • It was due to California. When I went to bed at midnight Tuesday, Trump had a million-vote lead in the popular. However, Cali kept churning out more returns for her through the next day.

      • Pretty simple, Trump was demonized. 5% of those polled were too embarrassed to admit they were voting him, even though they intended to.

      • There are also the likely voter models. One of the factors is how many times has the person voted in the past. Trump brought out a lot of first time voters.

      • @JPatrick I recently moved to Washington state for a new job. When I was born here 30 years ago the state was predominantly red, or at least that’s what my parents tell me. Sad to see the ridiculousness that now flourishes here. We didn’t manage to send our electoral votes to Trump despite our efforts, but at least we managed to turn down the CO2 tax of fuel. I consider that a good win.

        They did pass a minimum wage hike which I am not pleased about but you win some and you lose some, right?

      • Except for the ABC travesty, the tracking polls were right on. Not just IBD but LA Times and Rasmussen.

        The regular surveys, as by NBC and CBS, were off, showing Clinton winning by mid-single digits, as did the ABC tracking poll. Cooked books. NBC sample had way too many Democrats.

      • I think the main point is that the polls were used to predict/project or determine that with almost 100% certainty Clinton would win the election. In that sense, most of the polls failed and were not useful indicators. Actually, I should state it another way. The polls were worse than not useful, they were manipulated in such a way as to point to a predetermined and wrong conclusion.

      • Florida: I would suggest also that Trump had the support of Jewish retirees. He was the candidate with a credible promise of amity toward Israel.

        Washington: I was born here in 1951 and it has always been Democrat dominated. We are the home of the International Workers of the World. In my father’s time, the nation was sometimes referred to as “the 47 states and the soviet of Washington.” What Republican governors we’ve had were indistinguishable from moderate Democrats. The most conservative governor in my memory was Dixy Lee Ray, and she was a Democrat. Plus, as was discussed recently on local talk radio, Republicans do not show up for the polls. Some serious GOP house-cleaning is necessary. The GOP candidates for Governor and Senator made hay of their rejection of Donald Trump. Guess how they finished in the polls. The Seattle city council is so dominated by flagrant socialists that they have made the city into a paragon of “tolerance” for homelessness, drug use, traffic constipation, and squalor. It is a crime that a place so blessed by God with natural beauty is drowning in the filth of human fecklessness.

        Also, it was remarkable that Trump INVARIABLY drew GIGANTIC crowds to his rallies, and Clinton was reduced at one point to hiring stand-ins…yet no one in the nattering class had the wit to draw a conclusion from this fact. Talk about staring an elephant charge in the face and passing it off as a mirage.

      • All – Yesterday I posted late, as my normal business responsibilities kept me from my favorite past time, reading WUWT.

        As to a carbon tax in Washington State, I posted at lunch time yesterday on another thread, this factoid – it is appropriate now in this thread:

        “…. but lest we forget, Jay Inslee was just re-elected as Governor in WA State last night, and he has already directed the State Department of Ecology to complete a hidden Carbon Tax, a ‘Poison Pill’ stealth tax on large Carbon (Dioxide) emitters:

        http://www.ecy.wa.gov/climatechange/carbonlimit.htm

        As you read through the regulatory text, you’ll see a few things: 1) The new tax will be invoked if and when the federal Clean Power Plan is not put into play (the ‘Poison Pill clause), and 2) Is justified by the EPA’s CO2 ‘Endangerment Finding’. So, the constituents of WA State are not out of the Carbon Tax Fog just yet.

        Hoping that the EPA’s ‘Endangerment Finding’ is soon to be found as found-less, and only then could the State plan be deemed so as well.

        I can dream big, can’t I

        Regards,

        MCR

      • I was able to confidently predict a Trump win several months ago.
        The Republican primary revealed that there was a shy Trump vote of several percent. He scored slightly better than his polls in every contest, and the places where he scored the most above his polling was in the places with the most vocal Trump haters, like the Rust Belt states and New England.
        Knowing that and adding it to the polling results made it obvious, even if you did not pay any attention to the huge crowds he drew at rallies for well over a year.
        But if you did happen to notice that he was drawing gigantic crowds at his rallies every single place he went, every day for over a year, that was even bigger clue that something was going on that wasn’t being shown in the polls

    • You are reading it wrong. “Climate Change” when mentioned by a global warming advocate means “global warming caused by human activities.” Real changes in climate happen constantly, of course, but they are talking about policies that are against humans thriving based on false data and fatally flawed climate computer models.

      Having a real denier in the White House is the best result of all. CO2 IS PLANT FOOD and WE NEED MORE NOT LESS as Earth cools for the next 30–120 years. CO2 is the minting growth factor for most plants, ao we need more.

      “Greenhouse gases” are a fabrication by the global warming cabal. These are really “radiative gases” that serve to col the planet at night and have virtually no net effect during the day. CO2 is not a pollutant and, even if it was, its benefits FAR OUTWEIGH its drawbacks, if any.

      • “climate change” means whatever one wants it to mean.

        It is actually a meaningless term because the climate is always changing on our planet, for the past 4.5 billion years, and we should be thankful the current climate is about as good as it has even been for humans, animals and the green plants we/they eat.

        For leftists “climate change” means:
        Since about 1975, we have been living in the early stages of a runaway greenhouse warming that will eventually end life on Earth as we know it. This coming catastrophe is being caused by humans burning fossil fuels. It can be stopped by humans doing everything we leftists say, without question.

        When described correctly, you might think only im-beciles would believe this climate change fantasy.
        And you would be correct

        If climate change meant only: “global warming caused by human activities”, then it would not scare many people.

        The leftist goal is to scare people, and then tell them how to live.

        The current fictional boogeyman is climate change.

        If that stops scaring, there will be another fictional boogeyman.

        I’m betting on exploding silicone breast implants.
        I’m already preparing my application for a government grant for further study.

      • Climate change mean the Antarctic Highlands sometimes are different from the North African deserts, although both are deserts, so there must be some cause for that difference. Damned if I know why. Both are subject to human influences.

        g

      • I disagree with your dismissal of “greenhouse gases.” Their effect is precisely what is predicted by radiative transfer theory and the absorption/emission spectrum of the gases. What cools the planet at night is radiative emission from the Earth’s surface. If the greenhouse gas concentration were to increase dramatically (such as by water appearing in the form of a blanketing cloud), then the cooling is inhibited by the insulating effect of re-radiation. If you want a cold night, look for a clear sky. If you want a moderate night, hope for cloud cover. (I live in the Pacific northwest and it is like this all the time.)

    • She also refers to ‘climate advocates’ and ‘climate leaders’. What the heck do those terms mean? Heck, I advocate the climate keep on keeping on. And why don’t the ‘climate leaders’ lead the climate to the point we want it to stay at. Where ever that ideal point is.
      Rhetorical nonsense.

    • But don’t you love the reference to the nation’s “climate leaders” in the text. Luckily I’ve never denied being a “climate denier” so now I can freely say “some deny the climate and some lead it”. Meaningful ++!

    • Marianne Lavelle: Climate Equivocator
      By declaring Trump a “climate denier” Marianne Lavelle appeals to the political redefinition of “climate change” by the UN FCCC as due to anthropogenic causes, yet objects when people use scientific definition of “climate change” as long term variation in atmospheric conditions.
      Lavalle further “tars and feathers” Trump by insinuation of denying the Holocaust and being anti-science, when he objects to the UNFCCC political definition and the objective lack of convincing scientific evidence.
      Noah Webster 1828 Dictionary:

      EQUIVOCA’TION, noun Ambiguity of speech; the use of words or expressions that are susceptible of a double signification. Hypocrites are often guilty of equivocation and by this means lose the confidence of their fellow men. equivocation is incompatible with the christian character and profession.
      EQUIV’OCATE, verb intransitive To use words of a doubtful signification; to express one’s opinions in terms which admit of different senses; to use ambiguous expressions. To equivocate is the dishonorable work of duplicity. The upright man will not equivocate in his intercourse with his fellow men.

      Merriam Webster online

      Equivocate: to use unclear language especially to deceive or mislead someone

      Equivocation (also known as: doublespeak)

      Description: Using an ambiguous term in more than one sense, thus making an argument misleading. . . .
      Tip: When you suspect equivocation, substitute the word with the same definition for all uses and see if it makes sense.

      The foundational problem and source of this equivocation is that the UN’s FCCC REDEFINED “Climate Change”

      FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE, Article 1, Definitions:
      2. “Climate change” means a change of climate which is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere and which is in addition to natural climate variability observed over comparable time periods.

      See also: Redefining Dangerous Climate Change

    • Wonderful! I can’t get enough! The world will follow. Bit by bit, step by step. Politicians all around the world right now are taking notes and learning from this. President Trump is leading the way back to sanity and self-respect for all. This is going to be truly historical and HUGE.

      • Hey man back at you, I won’t argue with that, Cephus0, although it might be said an Aussie gave it the first go.

        What I’m so excited about with Trump is that no one owns him. He doesn’t owe anyone any favors and no one’s got hold of any strings. He got there on his own dime.

        Brexit was – and is – FANTASTIC and the alarmists are running scared. Trump just magnified that ten-fold and now Gang-Green (gangrene) is truly panicking. It’s all the juicier for them totally – TOTALLY – not expecting it.

        I so love this year 2016. :)

  4. “They had already prepped their wish lists for Clinton that included a massive clean energy spending program”

    So, in other words, they are unhappy that Trump will take away their Taxpayer paid retirement fund ?

    • “Carbon pollution” may be a real problem, if they’re concerned about soot in the Arctic. Otherwise, meh.

      • At least one episode of Star Trek and the first Star Trek revolved around robotic spacecraft cleaning up “carbon pollution.”

      • Was “Nomad” really a Green program? It would make sense since its most common comment was “Sterilize, Sterilize” which does seem to be the same program that the Greens have for the human race in general.

  5. While it’s a delight to win this battle in the war, be wary of triumphalism.

    The CO-2 Klimate Krazies aren’t going to go away. They’ve had a taste of what junk science came very close to accomplishing.

    • President Trump will quickly restore SCOTUS to its 5-4 or 4-4-1 Scalia balance. If he gets to replace Ginsberg (83), Breyer (78) and/or Kennedy (80), Trump could build a 7-2 constructionist majority. This will have a lasting effect.

      • I agree Dave, it will protect America for at least the next 30 years…And hopefully that effect will infect Canada…If not, I am moving back to the good old U.S.A. to finish my retirement…

      • Didn’t Justice Ginsberg state that she would move to New Zealand if Trump one? Can we start a collection to buy her a one-way ticket (first class, of course).

      • Hannity will buy her ticket if she agrees to stay for 5 years or the duration of her life, whichever comes first.

      • All the more reason for honest men to proclaim reason and truth clearly and with vigor. Trump has opened the door. We have no one to blame if we sit on the sidelines. (I realize that most of the participants on this page are probably active, but this is an exhortation for all those who are content merely to be on this page: do more.)

      • I may have enough airline points to get her a one way first class ticket…have to check to be sure. But, if I do, I’ll be happy to volunteer them.

      • I hope you’re right.

        It’s going to be far more difficult to “Drain The Swamp” than many people comprehend. The 49% will fight tooth and nail for every inch. In the long run, I suspect (and fear) this will be seen as simply one more battle in a long, long war.

    • But the US has always been on control of the earth’s temperature; I’m pretty sure “adjusting” will be gone.

      • No, the Climate Knobs (I’m not naming names) in the US have been in control of earth’s “temperature”.

  6. “At first, that will mean an effort to block Trump’s plans, perhaps by convincing Senate Democrats to block appointments or use the filibuster”

    And Trump will convince both houses to use the “Nuclear Option”, just like dishonorable Harry Reid did…

    • Under Majority Leader Bill Frist, the Republicans refused to use the “Nuclear Option” when the Democrat minority blocked Bush-43’s judicial nominees because they didn’t want to set a precedent. Harry Reid set the precedent. That horse already left the stable.

    • No need to use the nuclear option in the House, they don’t have filibusters.

      Isn’t it fascinating how the Democrats get all bent out of shape whenever Republicans use tactics that they invented.

      It was Harry Reid who invented the tactic of calling pro-forma sessions during the winter break in order to prevent Bush from making recess appointments. When the Republicans did it to block Obama, it was the most evil thing ever done in the history of DC.

  7. The reactionaries that lead opinion in the climate obsessed community are going to become the John Birchers of the 21st century, spouting off on intricate grand conspiracies and the equivalent fluoridated drinking water. Climate obsession is more of a failed sci-fi story plot- sciencey veneer on a worn out scary end of the earth story. One told since at least the time of the writers of the Noah’s Ark story.

    • Try Gilgamesh; even earlier. Many have observed over time that to rule people, all you have to do is scare them. Instead of outsiders, gods, monsters, etc., they just started using “science.”

  8. It is now the time to rhetorically wash the green blob with holy water and bury it in a crossroads with a stake in its heart. Do unto others as they would do unto you, but do it first!

  9. Looks like the climate change gravy train (renewables powered, of course) just ran out of steam. What did you expect from an intermittent, unreliable source anyway?

      • Texas won’t dump wind. If the PTC (Production Tax Credit) is repealed, the rate of new wind installations will decline here.

        If Federal subsidies are slashed, the deployment rate of solar and wind installations will decline. California will probably continue State-level subsidies or even expand them until they go bankrupt. Solar makes at least a little bit of sense in Hawaii because they don’t have access to natural gas.

      • The inefficient rooftop installer lobby will not go away even if it is 8x more costly than utility and community scale solar.

      • If defacing their roofs with solar panels makes people feel good… Power to them.
        If people think that prepaying for 20 years of electricity is smart economics… Power to them.

        If those same people want me to help pay for their bad decisions… They can go to hell.

      • Concentrated solar like Ivanpah is expensive because of large construction costs. The production and maintenance expenses are not huge (I hope). It makes little sense to shut them down; the mistake was to build them – but that money has been spent already. How about Google absorbing construction costs?

      • Wind and solar make significant extreme sense in Hawaii since their location makes everything else far more expensive. I would like to see some geothermal there. It should be economical given the volcanoes.

      • I agree w/others that Federal subsidies for renewables should end completely — they’ve been going long enough for the industrial bases & installations to develop.

        If states want to subsidize, fine.

      • Griff November 10, 2016 at 9:06 am

        Why think small? WHAT DO YOU THINK THIS WILL DO TO CHINA’S WIND TURBINE AND SOLAR PANEL PRODUCTION AND TRADE? Sorry for yelling at the top of my lungs but I am giddy.
        This is going to be fun.

        michael

      • ‘will California, NY, Hawaii, Texas and Iowa change tack on renewables?’

        No, probably not. The powers that be will continue to piss away ‘other people’s money’ due to the complete lack of accountability government affords itself.

      • Resourceguy asks:

        Will Ivanpah shut down?

        That needs to happen – ASAP!

        Thank the Creator for giving America a candidate who fights. A guy who refused to give up. A guy who had to fight and beat sixteen other candidates during the Primaries — and then he had to fight not just the opposition candidate, but half of his own Party!

        He had to fight Big Media too, including every television network, every big city newspaper, and every Spanish language radio station — plus censoring of supportive comments by Facebook, Twitter, and the ‘comments’ sections of newspapers like the WaPo, the NY/LA Times, and many others. The President Elect won for one simple reason: because he wouldn’t give up.

        That’s the kind of President this country needs: someone who will fight for our country, not someone who is constantly apologizing for it.

        Regarding Ivanpah, the Snowflake contingent would need industrial strength smelling salts if they were aware of the hundreds of birds being incinerated every day by Ivanpah:

        But the media won’t show people what’s really happening at Ivanpah because their ‘news’ is massaged, filtered, and spoon-fed to the public.

        Most folks aren’t aware of the birds being killed and maimed by the hundreds — every day.

        Each smoke trail in that link is a bird being incinerated in mid-flight. The killing of wildlife goes on at Ivanpah whenever the sun shines.
        [source]

        Question: Where is Greenpeace??

        …or Treehugger? Or Tamina, or Mann, or Hotwhopper, or all the other “renewables” promoters, grifters, hucksters, enviros, and self-serving eco-shills? Are any of them apologizing for this deliberate wildlife destruction? Do they even question it?

        Answer: No. They’re hiding out as usual, just like they hide out from all fair, impartial debates.

        The engineers who designed the Ivanpah bird cooker aren’t stupid. They knew it would kill birds. We knew it, too. Focusing several acres of solar radiation into an area of a few square metres that birds fly through… duh!

        But after seeing how easily Solyndra looted the Treasury with no repercussions, they jumped on the eco-bandwagon with this insane version of ‘Solyndra 2.0’.

        That leaves Griff, who started this sub-thread. I have a question for him:

        Griff, please give us your 2¢ on Ivanpah: Have ‘renewables’ gone too far? Is the daily slaughter of hundreds of birds A-OK with you? Is the Ivanpah bird slaughter considered acceptable collateral damage in the Noble Cause of ‘climate change’?

        Honestly, Griff, what do you think about Ivanpah? Are you ready to draw the line there? Will you finally say: “Shut down Ivanpah, STAT”?

        At some time everyone wants a chance for redemption. This is your chance, Griff…

  10. gee … he’s considering putting energy experts in charge of the Dept of Energy … wow, this is my shocked face …

    • that was my first reaction as well. who would think someone would have the sense to install experts as opposed to advocates in government positions ,what a novel idea .

  11. “President-elect Donald Trump is not a “climate denier.”
    So true, the only REAL “D’Niers” are those on the left that think the climate has always stayed the same for 4.5 billion years….Maybe we should call them the “Ice Age D’niers” ??

  12. See what happens when you bypass the rules and try to change everything with executive orders? That’s right… the next guy undoes everything.
    Maybe we’re descending into an ice-age kind of loop, where for 8 years the coal and oil industries are crippled and broken, then 8 years of rebuilding and production. You can see how much the left are actually interested in stability and prosperity… ie. not at all.

    • the next guy undoes everything….
      Code. I think the liberals have become so isolationist…they thought they would win forever

      • Agreed. They thought they had everybody’s hearts and minds. They thought they had it all locked down. They thought they were unstoppable. And then someone came along and gave The People real respect and a real choice. What a wonderful day! :)

      • It is true…they thought they would never lose again.
        That is why they are now losing their minds.
        This is a bona fide case of mass hysteria as well.
        These people who are freaking out because they believe their own lies…they forgot at some point that campaign smears and made up slanders are just that. So now they are whipping themselves into a froth because the devil is President.
        It is scary and funny and thrilling and pathetic all at once.

      • He actually said this BUT he continued on after he said “It will feel good” to trash Trump and promote Hillary. But that doesn’t change the fact that these words ended up being prophetic.

    • One problem. Trump’s plan can’t work.
      The end result is that the plants will still close, because they are losing money.
      The only difference is that some other foreign plant will be supplying the cars, not Ford’s. Probably not even an American company.

      • MarkW November 10, 2016 at 1:12 pm

        Just go back to the trade policies of the Nineteenth Century they worked quite well. We only started to have problems after we started opening our doors predatory trade.
        Only allow a 2-10% market share to imported cars. Once that number is sold imports are frozen.

        Announce tariff on certain manufactured goods which we have been forced out of in our own markets. Have them go into effect starting in say 18 months. Any start up American Company gets 5- 10 year tax break.

        The things we export are items other countries need. Example Japan imports agricultural product only as a luxury and little manufactured product.

        If we can make it here, mine it here and grow it here, by our own hands, then we should trade first with our self’s, before allowing any imports.

        michael

      • Mike, that’s a great plan if your goal is to impoverish the people of the US.
        It doesn’t matter if the stuff we export is what other countries need, not if they can get them cheaper elsewhere.
        Why should I be forced to pay more for stuff that often isn’t as good, just because some guy doesn’t want to compete?

      • MarkW November 10, 2016 at 2:36 pm

        I understand that that has been the position pushed, but when we had tariffs and protected the jobs of our people, you did not have folks working two jobs and still not making ends meet. We have people who are the bread winners of families stuck in entry level jobs, and signing voting to raise minimum wages because people pushed so called free trade. It was a mistake; it needs to end.

        ” Why should I be forced to pay more for stuff that often isn’t as good, just because some guy doesn’t want to compete?”

        Really? Every one competes. They are forced to, I have noticed that your argument is mainly used by those who have a captive clientele, in other words, no competition. Yes, you will pay more because just as you deserve a fair wage, so do your fellow citizens. The more people working in manufacturing and industry and natural resource harvesting, the more economic activity occurs. More wealth means more taxes at a lower rate to preform the necessary and proper tasks of Government.

        Understand this, Mr Trump won this election on the votes of the “Rust Belt”. Now where do you stand, with getting your fellow citizens back to work, or the Democrats taking both the Senate and the House in two years. By “YUGE” numbers. You are falling into the same trap the media and both parties’ elites did, believing your own propaganda.
        Think about it back in the 1970’s the mantra was buy American, the job you save may be your own. Too many did not heed. They used self serving excuses, as you have. Look around you. You put in an honest day’s work for an honest day’s pay, as do most of the people around you.
        In my years in the trade, one day I could be machining aerospace parts, the next car parts. Or who knows what they were. Have you ever done “Piece work”? So are you going to say I or my employer would not compete? Or do you really mean, I or someone like me should be paid the same as a third world worker? Because that is what it amounts to.
        I know I seem harsh but its called for, Think about what I have said, and think about two years from now, that is the window we have. Remember this, the Liberals will be watching and taking notes.

        still a friend
        michael

    • I’d love to slap a 35% tariff on cars that were once assembled in the Midwest and are now assembled in Mexico! Keep American jobs here! Unfortunately, those aren’t “American jobs”; those are private sector jobs! Donald Trump doesn’t have the right to tell an American company how to conduct its business. It he tries, it could “merge” with a foreign company headquartered overseas and tell him – in the immortal words of the wise Michael Moore – “f*** ***”.

      If Trump’s intimidation succeeds, a foreign auto manufacturer can – in theory – set up an assembly plant in Mexico and have a strong competitive advantage over an inefficient plant in the Midwest. In the long run, that will probably will cost more American jobs than closing a single inefficient plant.

      Trump certainly could go after all foreign car assembly, but thousands of Americans now assemble cars for foreign companies here in the US in right-to-work states. Their jobs are vulnerable to retaliation. Even worse, no foreign company is going to invest in a country threatening to start a trade war. And – without the threat of competition – the UAW will regain the labor monopoly that was partially responsible for the decline of the Big Three. (Seriously, if there were no threat of competition, wouldn’t you – as an assembly line worker – vote to join the UAW and extort higher wages from your fellow Americans, who can’t buy non-union cars?)

      It is easy to say: “Tear down the temple! Ignore the elite experts! However, history tells us that revolutionary change often doesn’t turn out well. With his ego, bankruptcies, authoritarianism, inexperience and other personal weaknesses, DT is a big risk. I admittedly have more to lose than the average Trump supporter. However, even those who have suffered the most from changes over the last few decades live in an American that is STILL GREAT compared with the rest of the world. Europe has never recovered from the financial crises. Greece (25% unemployment, 44% below the poverty line) is on their third bailout and 13th austerity plan under a former Communist populist admired by Bernie Sanders (http://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/statement-on-the-election-in-greece). Japan is in its third decade without any economic growth, and now has a debt/GDP ratio of 225%. An Indian at the 95th percentile has the same standard of living as an American at the 5th percentile. China’s debt has tripled since 2009 to 160% of GDP, private investment has stopped growing and economic growth is being propped up by wasteful government spending on infrastructure. Their financial crisis could have a wider impact than ours in 2008.

      None of this means that I’m blind to the changes of the last three decades that have disrupted the lives of many Americans and spurred the rise of BOTH Trump and Saunders/Warren. (One of these could be Trump’s successor if he fails to deliver on his unrealistic promises.) The growing concentration of wealth and income in the top 10%, and 1% and especially the top 0.1% is suppressing the demand for goods and therefore employment. With QE already producing negative real interest rates, Trump’s tax cuts for the rich are going to fuel deficits, but not new investment. Lower interest rates have driven capital into an inflated stock market, but that money is being mostly being used to fund mergers that reduce competition and employment. The mutual funds that own (rent) most publicly owned companies don’t care about anything but net quarter’s earnings. Perhaps Trump has the political capital needed to address these fundamental problems, but I suspect he will need to hire some realistic “elite” advisors to come up with a good program to confront these challenges. And which elite advisors – in foreign or economic policy – will be willing to work for a populist who disdains their expertise?

      I hope Moore’s “f*** y**” doesn’t turn out to be “f*** us all”.

      • the very numbers you just used tell the story . the current system is not working for the majority. the “haves” would do well to heed the message just sent by the “have nots” at the ballot box. i do not know if trump is the man to effect meaningful change, but if he is not after stating his position ,he will pay a heavy price and at some point in the not too distant future the people of america and other developed nations will start electing some very unsavoury characters.

        the last lot of elites though they could carry on unabated right up to the point their heads were dropping into a basket. i would hope the current lot would have history to warn them of the path they are treading.

      • If we have a “right to work”, then there is no good reason we would need to go oversees to make cars and bring them back. Japan makes great cars with American labor, as you say, where there is a right to work. So, lowering the corporate tax and allowing states to have the right to work protection, should enable production to thrive. This is how states are supposed to be laboratories of democracy and should set the example. States that allow unions to force people not to work should take the issue to the ballot box.

  13. “Seven of the eight Koch-backed Senate candidates were victorious”

    It doesn’t bother anyone that rich fossil fuel interests bankroll candidates?

    I mean they are surely part of an establishment elite and not doing much for your average blue collar worker?
    (except tangentally for the odd coal miner)

    • How many blue collar workers drill oil & gas wells? Operate and maintain oil & gas production equipment. Build, operate and maintain oil & gas pipelines? Are wages of blue collar workers in the oil & gas industry high? Or low?

      • I also failed to mention the oilfield services and geophysical contractors industries. Most of the members of well logging and seismic acquisition crews are blue collar workers.

      • David, you also forgot the surveyors, who are second on the scene, to map out the area of interest and to cut clear paths to the area..I tried it for 3 months ( I was a laid off Iron Worker) and it was a hot, sweaty, itchy, physically challenging job…I was so glad to get back on the the “steel”, I gladly took a pay cut…

      • shhhh…..let’s see how long it takes Griff to realize Saudi Arabia, Oman, and Qatar are rich fossil fuel interests

        …and what the Clinton Foundation is

    • It doesn’t bother anyone that rich fossil fuel interests bankroll candidates?

      absolutely….especially when they pay people to riot, threaten, attack…
      …when they pay to play politicians under the table
      etc……….

    • hmmm it doesn’t bother you or the progressives that Soros funded Hillary and thugs to create violence and discord at peaceful Trump events? Does/did it bother Hillary or the progressives when Soros funded violence at the other “social” protests? Also wasn’t it the progressives and President Obama that gloated and gave the finger to conservatives when they won the election and said “elections have consequences” or is that only when your/their side wins one? Green and progressives are synonymous with hypocrisy!

      Cheers!!
      Joe

    • All of the anti-energy policies have a common effect, that of driving up the cost of manufacturing. Higher costs to create or operate a factory has the obvious effect of driving manufacturing jobs off-shore. High cost of labor is still an issue, but reducing the operating costs will be large incentive for bringing back factory jobs for the unemployed in areas like the rust belt.

    • The Koch Industries and Foundations have provided wealth to people (100,000 employees) and charities beyond your imagination. If you try, you can find most (not all) of their contributions on the web. Allow for some time, more if you read slowly.

      By the way, Al Gore’s family accumulated their riches via politics and fossil fuel interests. Do you trash Al, also.

    • Note that Griff, and the rest of the left wing never complain when Soros backs candidates.
      Secondly, Koch brothers obeyed the campaign finance laws which proves that they did not bankroll these candidates.

    • Not as much as HRC getting 20% of her campaign financed by the House of Saud or her being a George Soros sock-puppet.

      I guess I’m just not up to date with why the Kocks are the epitome of Evil(tm).

    • It bothers me more that a foreigner, George Soros, is spending tens to hundreds of millions of dollars trying to mold our political landscape to suit his world view.

      • And there is nothing anyone can do about it.
        Every attempt to try and limit this money just makes those doing the donating work harder to hide the money they are donating.
        The money doesn’t stop, it just uses new channels.

        As long as government controls buying and selling, the first thing bought and sold will be politicians.
        PJ O’Rourke

    • And Tom Steyr purportedly spent $US27M on the California election. Doesn’t bother me – it’s his money.

    • “rich fossil fuel interests bankroll candidates”

      You mean, as opposed to BIG GREEN buying off candidates or others using money syphoned off from Haiti donations?

    • It bothers me more- a lot more- that Soros, Bezos, and other even wealthier billionaires are buying up the politics of whole states. Bezos to protect his Amazon monopoly distributing counterfeit and faux goods, Soros, because he is hoping to be the James Bond bad guy who actually wins apparently(lol).
      No, the Koch brothers are at least as free to back candidates they like as you or me. Or even slime balls like Soros or Bezos. People liked what the candidates stand for in large enough numbers to elect them.
      You are just a whiny sore loser whose obsession on CO2 is falling apart and your smug self-declared superiority is falling apart.
      Toughsky Schtufsky.

  14. Oooooh The schadenfreude is just too orgasmatically intense for words. Such pleasure must be wrong somehow. :) GK

  15. Trump should FIRE Gavin Schmidt and return NASA GISS to its created purpose: “to perform basic research in space sciences in support of GSFC (Goddard Space Flight Center) programs.”

    It was never created to study climate change.

    • I don’t think Dr. Schmidt is an appointee, but a Federal employee. This makes it hard to fire him. But what President Trump could do is zero out the funding for GISS. And a lot of other climate science labs in NASA and NOAA. And the National Endowment for the Arts. But I dream…

      • This makes it hard to fire him.

        Climate research in northern Alaska 50 weeks / year. Or maybe tagging and counting polar bears.

      • Well, before you go shooting yourself in the foot (or my foot ) you might want to realize that the first A in NASA stands for Aeronautical. If you think we don’t need airplanes or high speed transportation by all means zero out NASA. Understand that I am not a fan of NASA as a whole, in that they have a bloated standing army of marginally useful people.
        Let’s not throw the baby out with the bath water just yet, perhaps merely a diet would suffice to reduce the bloat.

      • What I would like to see him do is to relocate the GISS to Nome, Alaska, and require ALL Federal Employees of the GISS to move there year round.

        I think most would suddenly see the wisdom of early retirement.

      • rocketscientist November 10, 2016 at 10:53 am
        Well, before you go shooting yourself in the foot (or my foot ) you might want to realize that the first A in NASA stands for Aeronautical.

        It stands for “astronautics”…

        Definition of astronautics
        : the science of the construction and operation of vehicles for travel in space beyond the earth’s atmosphere

        http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/astronautics

      • Mumbles McGuirck “I don’t think Dr. Schmidt is an appointee, but a Federal employee. This makes it hard to fire him.”
        How about a 4 year tour of duty in Antarctica?

      • Give him a windowless office in the sub-basement. No computer, no books, just a desk and ergonomically deficient chair.

      • David Middleton –

        Please remember that the first A in NASA is aeronautics. It gets short shrift compared to the space side of NASA, but it might behoove the US to actually increase its spending in the atmospheric flight sciences, at least a bit.

      • Why did NASA have to hire a Brit and NCAR a Kiwi to make up packs of science fiction lies? Weren’t there enough dishonest, GIGO computer gamers who are American citizens?

      • Okay note the name Goddard Institute for Space Studies. Now read the link and what the Institute is really doing.
        Now I think it is time for a preformance review in regards Dr Schmidt’s cotrebution to “Space Studies”. Now many manned rocket launchs has he been a been involved with? Which launch vehicles has he work on? Which probes which expeiments?
        If the answer is none and the climate lab is shut down then his position disappears, and like any other employee whos job is elimanated he is out on the sidewalk. Not fired “Layed off” And have to wait it out in the unemployment line.

        Of course he can request too be .. oh I should just type it out, “Retire Aged Personal Early (D)”

        :-D

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goddard_Institute_for_Space_Studies

        michael

      • “Aeronautics” not “astronautics”

        “The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is an independent agency of the executive branch of the United States federal government responsible for the civilian space program as well as aeronautics and aerospace research.[note 1]”

      • Chimp asks why US hires a Brit and a Kiwi as climate liars at NASA and NCAR.

        Answer: It’s harder for the American ear to hear their quibbling climate lies when they have an accent.

    • I attended a presentation by Jack Schmitt at the AAPG convention in Houston a few years ago. He advocates getting Earth Science (which includes climate, ocean and atmospheric sciences) totally out of NASA and putting it where it belongs: USGS and NOAA. The National Astronautics and Space Administration is supposed to be focused on astronautics and space.

      Definition of astronautics
      : the science of the construction and operation of vehicles for travel in space beyond the earth’s atmosphere

      http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/astronautics

      • David–it seems that every “well intended” government bureaucracy suffers from mission creep. that is something that has needed addressing for many years. My hope is that the government can get off of it’s BS track, and start dealing with issues that urgently need addressing. Foreign policy would be at the top of my list.

      • Yep… The USGS employs wildlife biologists… Why?

        U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) science includes more than just geology! Our research is dedicated to the timely, relevant, and impartial study of the health of our ecosystems and environments, our natural resources, the impacts of climate and land use change, and the natural hazards that affect our lives. USGS science encompasses, but is not limited to, the following fields:
        • Biology and Ecosystems
        • Climate Change
        • Energy and Minerals
        • Environmental Health
        • Geology
        • Mapping, Remote Sensing,and Geospatial Data
        • Natural Hazards
        • Planetary Science
        • Water
        Please note: U.S. citizenship is required for all government positions

        https://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/0166/gip166.pdf

        Biology, ecosystems and environmental health are almost entirely unrelated to geoscience.

      • You’ve got it wrong twice now. It’s

        National Aeronautics and Space Administration

        not “Astronautics”

      • Sorry, folks, but from NASA’s website, a few minutes ago: National Aeronautics and Space Administration. It has always been aeronautics. “Astronautics and Space” would be redundant. (My degree is in aeronautics and astronautics.) I know that the proponents od CAGW / CC like to change things, but this hasn’t changed.

    • Michael E. Mann ‏@MichaelEMann 18h18 hours ago
      Didn’t understand how @realDonaldTrump won the election until I received this email this evening:

    • We already subsidize the sale of Boing products, now you want the US to pick up the tab for their research as well?

  16. “carbon pollution” – since all known life is carbon based I think most of the carbon pollution on the planet is currently attending COP22

  17. I am afraid that the climate crazies will just shift their focus to the individual states. It will be a problem to fight on fifty fronts.

      • They haven’t made much headway in Texas. And in places like California, where they are succeeding at the moment, guess what their prize is? Less jobs, and a WHOLE lot less tax revenue for the state. Ooops, sooner or later somebodies gonna start missing all that cash.

      • No longer a state = no Interstate Commerce Clause = no more tariff-free electric umbilical cord to keep their Green energy dreamchild alive.

        Plus, NorCal could then break from SoCal and ask to be re-annexed as its own state, like they’ve wanted to do for over a century.

        So by all means, let ’em secede. May the door hit them on the way out.

  18. Well surely there’s still enough money in the Clinton Foundation for Hillary to continue to “tackle climate” ?

  19. “perhaps by convincing Senate Democrats to block appointments or use the filibuster.”

    When Harry Reid nuked the filibuster in November 2013, what he did was to remove all Federal Judge and all Executive-Administrative appointments (cabinet secretaries/deputies, all the president’s political appointees to boards and commissions, etc) from the Filibuster-Cloture rule (but not the US Supreme Court Justice appointments and legislation). Thus Republicans only need 51 votes to affirm all of President Trumps’ executive branch appointments.

    The US Senate will likely have 52 Republicans when the 115th Congress is sworn this January 2017.

    So as for blocking appointments, there will be nothing for the Greens/Libtards/Demo-rats to do but more whining. tantrums, crying, and then blaming the Dishonest one-eyed Harry Reid for making their plight even worse.

    And OBTW in a bit of even more schadenfreude, Ole One-eyed Reid, expecting for Hillary as President to follow Obama, said in October 2016 that he had laid the groundwork to further nuke the filibuster for Supreme Court nominees. Too funny.

    • I don’t think they’ve come out of denial for long enough yet to comprehend the Supreme Court nominee issue. There are other seriously old Judges on there too. It could get even more interesting.

    • Justice Ginsburg will be 84 in March, Kennedy 81 in July and Breyer 79 in August. Sotomayor will turn only 63 in June, but has health problems.

    • Is it wrong to enjoy the law of unintended consequences catch up with the Democrats? And, note, the law cannot be repealed by any Congress, nor is it subject to Judicial Review in any court.

  20. For me it was who’s for climate change and who’s against it. There was bigger issue. A week or so ago I realized exactly what was at stake. The world was moving to a world order controlled by committee, a non elected body. That’s what Brexit was about. I saw little chance that Trump would win, the stars must have aligned. This is an American Amexit.

    • I’m *for* climate change. Without climate change, sedimentary geology would be very boring… It might not even exist.

      • I am stretching my mind for the details but I recall that the more biological agencies were moved to the USGS because they drifted away from their charge. It may have somewhat worked as geologists may be better glued to the earth. Wonder if they could handle NOAA, NASA, EPA, etc.?

      • Look at the big clean out of climate scientists that happened recently in Australia. We can expect something similar in the US. Poetic justice. It might be dawning on some of them right about now that if you stop being objective scientists and start being political activists you subject yourself to the winds of political change. Also if you go around saying “The science is finished” people may just start asking what we are employing all these climate scientists for.

  21. Great post David. Donald Trump’s pledge can’t come soon enough. Long overdue & should be followed in the
    UK.

  22. Perhaps the alarmists will crank up the alarmism and claim an increased rate of warming with catastrophic consequences.

    Oops, I see they have done that already.

  23. The world of “climate action” has been turned upside down. Meanwhile, the world of truth, actual science, and common sense has finally been turned rightside up. The howls and tears of the Climatists just makes it all the more delightful.

  24. They have to keep Trump alive to establish anything and that may be tricky knowing how the Establishment works.

    • They’ll have to bump off not just Trump, but Pence, Ryan and Hatch, then whomever the survivor nominates as cabinet secretaries.

      • And then face down a second American Revolution as most of the country enters open rebellion in response.

  25. I must admit a feeling of rightness in the world in anticipating the first steps to unravel the entire global warming movement as Trump takes his presidency. I do hope he follows through on many of the anticipated moves in energy, economy and environment policy. I fear however that there is more to do in public relations, science education and public discussion so that a large segment of the public don’t fall into a deep depression or a state of constant fear based on a belief that all of what has been predicted about the man-made global catastrophe built into climate models is true, rather than a feeble academic fantasy.

    Politics is largely driven by personality, perception, and image rather than substance, though this recent election may, in some ways, break that pattern. It will be too easy however for many to see Trump’s first moves as just an extension of “science denying” republican policy rather than a very rational and beneficial reconsideration of faulty policy built on flimsy science. I think we can all agree Trump was not elected based on his charming personality and good looks, but it will take some effort to reveal to the larger public the logic of what is soon to transpire.

    I would really like to see a transparent public science and policy inquest in addition to the very necessary steps of unravelling the whole policy framework based on global warming dogma. The public need to see what went wrong and why many of them came to believe something so monstrous and frightening that was never supported by a solid science foundation. Until the public see and understand how they’ve been fooled, they may not realize they have been fooled.

    An old anecdote and a more recent one may be relevant. King Canute had his throne placed by the sea and commanded the tides not rise in order to demonstrate to his followers that he was a mere mortal with wet feet. When Obama was elected he said it was the moment when the rise of the oceans would slow and the planet begin to heal. He also demonstrated (in the case unintentionally) that he was a mere mortal. When Trump is president one might envision him standing on the beach gazing off to the horizons stating “nice view, now let’s get to work.”

    • A good first step would be an EO directing the EPA to remove CO2 from the list of pollutants within 5 working days. Then track every single derivative policy/procedure that was dependent, in whole or in part, on that designation, and cancel them.

      • CO2 being labelled as a pollutant is just another liberal method of assigning a new meaning to a word that cannot be logically understood.
        -Gay no longer can be used to be happy.
        -Subsidize now means keeping some of your own money
        I could go on…

    • Mr. McIntyre and Ross McKittrick launched the first counterattack. They, along with Pat Michaels and Fred Singer inspired me to dive into the debate in Internet forums and that led me here.

      • Instead of having a science advisor, Trump should have an advisory committee for major issues like climate change and energy. Putting a Canadian or two on the committee would help us north of the border. Spencer, Micheals, Singer, Soon, Pielke Sr. , McIntyre and McKittrick would be a great bunch.

      • Anthony didn’t become one of my climate science heroes until I discovered Watts Up With That… ;)

  26. Trump needs to change the hearts and minds of the cult of CAGW and the general population, as opposed to simply blocking their crazy policies.

    Blocking the crazy cult of CAGW will only make them more crazy and will provide an issue for the next election.

    It appears, Trump will get some help (get some talking points for the media to support the assertion that there is no CAGW issue to solve), as the planet was started to cool, due to the interruption of the solar cycle.

    • I don’t think it’s up to Trump to change the Climate Crazy’s minds, nor do I think he could if he wanted to. One way or another, the CAGW Cult of Calamitous Climate is going down. De-fund them. Mock them. Destroy them. It’s go time. And yes, it’s fun to watch Greenie heads explode.

      • I understand the sentiment, but Trump has just 4 years till he faces the voters again and that isn’t a lot of time to prove new policy is the right policy with respect to climate and energy. I really believe some effort by a large group of scientists and educators to uncover the guts of the climate change argument and show why it is just a pyramid scheme may be worthwhile. A public trail for this nonsense and a public execution in the town sq

      • I agree it’s a lot of fun, but I also want to see a real and public examination of facts and evidence – not computer models – a a good solid debate that the alarmists are unable to run away or hide from. It would go a long way to exposing the SC@M this has always been.

        Make climate scientists accountable for their words and prophesies. Watch the certainty disappear then! People will have a chance then to learn the truth. Probably not the die-hards, but then nothing will get through to them.

      • I agree that de-funding, mocking and ridicule should happen early and often, and also that it’s a heavy lift to change minds. But I think he should try, anyway. To them, he’s already a crazy denier, so he isn’t really risking any political capital to use his new bully-pulpit. With it he can shame the federal bureaucracy, states and local boards to stop being such scaredy-wimps, afraid of .5 degrees of warming. He should use his official power to stop giving activists and 501 groups preferential access to public employees and their work product or jobs and try to restrict \bureaucrats from attending UN or COP meetings as anything but private citizens on vacation paying with their own money. He should shame public sector unions and groups like Greenpeace to stop indoctrinating young children in CAGW or any other topic. For the school children, a memetic campaign should start that it’s science basics ONLY for children through middle school, and more abstract political sciences, public policy and environmentalism and other activism in schools is only for upper grade levels as an AP course, and then only with full balance from left and right perspectives, with old-school scientific rigor in effect if there is any science involved.

      • He should establish a “science court” to which appeals can be made from phony (engineered) consensus science. Example: Bad nutrition science.

  27. “The Seirra Club said that Trumps election is a bitter pill to swallow.”

    I believe it was more of a suppository.

    • This is what the Liberal Socialists call sane people……
      Caution: The following video may cause you to spontaneously burst out laughing !
      The Miley Ray Cyrus rant may be unprecedentedly dangerous to your health…. you have been warned !

  28. All the evidence suggests that the climate is improving. We were that close to suffering another four years, and likely eight, of catastrophic anthropogenic climate corruption.

  29. I hope that this will make the scientific “climate” change so that sceptical scientists can debate the real issues without be vilified.

  30. I know this is way off topic, but I have to vent.

    There is talk, now, that people should protest or sign petitions to convince the members of the Electoral College to vote for Hillary because she won the Popular Vote. While I can understand their frustration, this kind of initiative, after the fact, is completely unfair and unjust.

    The race for the Whitehouse is a race to win the Electoral College, not the Popular Vote. If it were not about the Electoral College there would be no such thing as Swing States. If two candidates were vying only for the Popular Vote the campaign strategies of each would be vastly different. I’m sure Donald Trump did not spend any time campaigning in California, for example, because he knew that as far as the Electoral College was concerned he wouldn’t be successful there according to the Popular Vote. Since it was a Race to win the Electoral College it didn’t matter to him if he lost California by 100 thousand votes or 3 million.

    If the competition were about winning the Popular Vote his strategy would have been much different. The “Game’, however, was about winning the Electoral College, not the Popular Vote. Hillary knew this too.

    Here is an analogy that might be useful for describing the difference between a competition for the Electoral College and the Popular Vote:

    The Electoral College is like the “scores” in a football game – touchdowns, field goals, safeties, and extra-points.

    The Popular Vote is like the statistics – yards gained, number of first-downs, passes completed, quarterback sacks, etc…

    Generally the team that has better statistics usually wins the scoreboard, but as any football fan can tell you, not always.

    Hillary may end up having better stats, but Trump won the scoreboard. She has yards gained, but he has touchdowns.

    To say that Hillary, after the fact, deserves to win this Election based on the Popular Vote is like saying that the team who had gained the most yards should be declared the winner of the football game rather than the team who scored the most points. The game was not about gaining the most yards (Popular Vote), the game was about scoring the most points (Electoral College).

    Thank you for letting me vent,
    Freedom Monger

    • It’s also the same thing as the Bremainers moaning and groaning about a do-over. Typical. If they don’t get what they want following the rules, change the rules after the fact.

    • All good points. Many people today (I blame our useless education system) seem not to understand the very intentional reason the electoral college system of voting exists. In the compromise of 1787, where this was devised, the small states objected to direct election of the President, as this would mean (at that time) that voters in Boston, New York, and Philadelphia would always control the Presidency and voters in the rest of the old colonies would never really matter because their populations were too small.

      They made it clear that they would never join a new Union set up under those rules. Now of course, the large states wanted direct election, because it would give them great power, but they couldn’t create a new country with it. SO, a system was devised where a President would HAVE to achieve majorities in many separate regions, NOT just huge majorities in the largest urban centers. Hillary is ahead in the raw vote total because she ran up huge vote totals in LA, Boston, Chicago, and NYC. Well, so what. The system is intentionally designed so that a candidate may NOT win that way.

      The real kicker is that the small states were clever enough to demand an amendment system restrictive enough to guarantee that this mechanism can NEVER be changed unless a majority of the small states agree to give away their electoral power to the big states. And of course, this they will never do.

      For 230 years (give or take), the large population states have wanted direct election of the President. For 230 years, they have been disappointed. I predict with great confidence that those in favor of direct election will continue to be disappointed for the next 230 years.

      • Unfortunately there was a way to circumvent the wonderful constitutional election system. The bankers set up the Federal Reserve so only New York mattered, then they achieved enough power so that the president is essentially controlled by the bankers. The president doesn’t even choose the Federal Reserve head …. oh sure he makes a symbolic choice to make it look like he is in charge … but the president is told who he has to choose.

    • If the Indians had scored 28 runs in the World Series and the Cubs only scored 27 runs, the Indians would still have lost the series because the Cubs won 4 games. The whining about the popular vote is moronic.

      While an Elector occasionally goes rogue and “votes their conscience,” there is no way these morons could overturn the Election by lobbying the Electors…

      Who selects the Electors?
      Choosing each state’s Electors is a two-part process. First, the political parties in each state choose slates of potential Electors sometime before the general election. Second, on Election Day, the voters in each state select their state’s Electors by casting their ballots for President.

      The first part of the process is controlled by the political parties in each state and varies from state to state. Generally, the parties either nominate slates of potential Electors at their state party conventions or they chose them by a vote of the party’s central committee. This happens in each state for each party by whatever rules the state party and (sometimes) the national party have for the process. This first part of the process results in each Presidential candidate having their own unique slate of potential Electors.

      Political parties often choose Electors for the slate to recognize their service and dedication to that political party. They may be state elected officials, state party leaders, or people in the state who have a personal or political affiliation with their party’s Presidential candidate. (For specific information about how slates of potential Electors are chosen, contact the political parties in each state.)

      The second part of the process happens on Election Day. When the voters in each state cast votes for the Presidential candidate of their choice they are voting to select their state’s Electors. The potential Electors’ names may or may not appear on the ballot below the name of the Presidential candidates, depending on election procedures and ballot formats in each state.

      The winning Presidential candidate’s slate of potential Electors are appointed as the state’s Electors—except in Nebraska and Maine, which have proportional distribution of the Electors. In Nebraska and Maine, the state winner receives two Electors and the winner of each congressional district (who may be the same as the overall winner or a different candidate) receives one Elector. This system permits the Electors from Nebraska and Maine to be awarded to more than one candidate.

      https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/electors.html

      Republican Electors aren’t going to vote for Hillary Clinton, particularly since rogue Electors can be prosecuted in some States.

      • I’m confident you’re right, but I’m also certain that Media Propagandists will try to make it seem as though these “victims of the system” have a case.

      • I don’t believe that either Maine or Nebraska has ever actually split their delegation. While it could happen, it hasn’t yet. I was hoping that Trump would be able to win the rural district in Maine, but it didn’t happen.

      • That is exactly what happened in the 1960 World Series between the Yankees and the Pirates. The Yankees outscored Pittsburgh 55 to 27 and out hit them 91-60 but Pittsburgh won the series and the title 4 games to 3. And of course who could forget the series walk off homer by Bill Mazeroski in the bottom of the 9th. A sad day in my young life at the time.

      • MarkW
        November 10, 2016 at 1:23 pm

        Obama won the NE CD with Omaha in it in 2008. Trump won the big rural ME CD this year.

      • Trump dragged a whole bunch of republicans through on his coat tails and revitalised a party that only a week ago the MSM was portraying as being in dire trouble. Anyone who thinks republican electors are going to vote against that has lost their marbles.

    • This reminds me of the 2000 elections. Before the election, when the polls predicted that Al Gore would win the Electoral College and George Bush the Popular Vote, we were sternly warned by the MSM that only the Electoral College mattered. When the actual election turned out the other way around, the MSM suddenly discovered how important the Popular Vote was. There was also talk then in the MSM of “flipping” some Electors to Al Gore.

    • I see it in much simpler terms.
      USA is collection of states. Each state takes simple majority for the choice of the president they want to have. Since could be only one president and not fifty, every state according to the size of their population is given a share of the presidential throne. One out of two, three or more candidates, who gets the largest share has the honour to sit on the presidential throne. It is a simple and perfectly democratic process.

      • Hi Vuk,
        Not quite but I understand your thought process. I would also make the distinction that there is a very big difference from “is a collection of states” (as you out it) and ” are a collection of States”.
        The United States of America ARE a country, meaning that individual States make up the Country rather than the Country is divided into states. A subtle but very important difference.

      • Doesn’t have to be a majority. Plurality counts.

        Before the Civil War and sometime after, people said “these united states”. Now it’s more common to hear “the United States”. The relation between the states and the federal government has changed drastically over the decades.

        Remains to be seen whether Trump’s lust for power will allow him to return to state and local government, private associations and most of all the people the powers which the national regime has usurped.

      • I don’t know if it’s true or not, but I have read that prior to the Civil War, the US was refered to as “these United States”. After it, the phrase changed to “the United States”.

      • MarkW, it could just be a matter of British English v. American English. What I noticed a long time ago is that the Brits used a plural to refer to corporate bodies (GM are) as opposed to the American singular (GM is). As far as legal theory, the US is both. Read the Federalist Papers on the original concept of the status of the Union.

    • Good points. The reason the Founders created the Electoral College, and decided that there should be 2 Senators per state, was so that the big states couldn’t “gang up” on the small states. If there were no electoral college, the election campaign would have been in about 15 ststes, and the heck with the rest of them.

      • And don’t forget that originally Senators were appointed by State legislatures not voted in by the people. The Founders did not want to give the average voter a direct say in Federal elections except for the House of Representatives where they restricted the term to 2 years in order to rapidly correct stupid voting. No way were they going to allow anyone to be popularly elected for 6 years. It also provided a valuable check on the Federal government as the Senators were accountable directly to their State and not outside influences. Pretty smart bunch those Founders.

      • To elaborate slightly on Tom in Florida’s point: The House of Representatives was intended to be the vehicle for the direct expression of the popular will. The Senate was intended to be the vehicle for the expression and protection of states’ rights. Senators were supposed to enforce the provisions of the 10th Amendment. It made perfect sense for the Senators to be determined by the governments of the state they represented, and to be subject to condign removal if they strayed from their task.

    • Monger,

      One WA elector, and maybe another, have sworn not to vote for Clinton, ie to be “faithless”, so ardent were they for Sanders.

      If, as looks likely, Trump should win MI but lose NH, he’ll have 306 EVs. Should all of the electors from states Clinton won vote for her, she’d need 38 faithless Republicans to win in the Electoral College, or 40 given two defectors from Washington State. That seems improbable.

    • Freedom Monger November 10, 2016 at 10:53 am

      easy does it friend. Each states popular vote elects a slate of electors. The states that are won by republicans
      send their parties chosen slate to Washington D.C. Same for Dems.

      You may get one or two ever few elections that just put their foot down and say heck no. The only case I know of from this election is a past Bernie supporter from Washington state who stated he will not cast his electoral vote for Hillary.
      Trump’s lead is great enough that one or two defectors won’t matter. And the efforts to play that card (popular vote) is just going to tick people off. The ppm in the popular vote would not equal a extra vote in the electoral college.

      Maybe just to be fair the Trump electors could clip their nails and donate them to the Dems to give them equal “weight”

      michael

  31. Trump is going to get a lot done in the first 100 days because so much of what Obama did was with executive orders outside of Congress and the courts. That includes major parts of ACA implementation with subsidies only in certain states as well. Get ready.

  32. Wouldn’t it be icing on the cake if we achieved a retreat from the policies and then the reported global temperatures when into a steady decline over the next 4 to 8 years… and the sea level reduced it increases…

  33. Re: Trump … Climate Denier, 11/10/16

    Cut ‘em a little slack, Middleton. In their world, Climate means Climate Change which is synonymous with Anthropogenic Global Warming. So it is in their world that the vector of racism is one way: whites against blacks. Hence, Affirmative Action is not racism. In the proper, highly vaunted election-aftermath speeches, coming together means you come around to agreeing with me, that’s all — up and down the line. Throughout the years, every civilized person wished the new President success. That was the test for being civilized. Just one caveat: not necessarily with his agenda. Wink, wink; nudge, nudge. He who controls the vocabulary wins the argument.

    In the last few days, I caught a nameless comedian on TV observing sarcastically that Republicans don’t believe in evolution! Indeed, some don’t. I can testify to that. Some Republicans profess a belief in God, too. Really! Not so much Democrats, though. But they accept evolution complete with Darwin’s supernatural selection! Democrats to a man (note that we can now be politically incorrect, h.t. to Trump) believe in AGW! Some pretty fair scientists, quotable ones who testify before Congress, won’t deny it! Ignorance is contagious. It is spread by schools, and no party or politician has a natural immunity.

    When Trump liquidates $100 billion from the climate scare, and retiring the EPA, he can turn his attention to closing the Department of Education. He might even find room for his plan to rebuild the U.S. “infrastructure”. Except for one little thing … 

    The service used to relish the expression, Overcome By Events — in military lingo, Oscar Bravo Echo, a noun or verb. Trump is going to wind up Oscar-Bravo-Echoed. Restoring confidence, he’s going to kick off a pent-up recovery from the Great Recession of 2008. The velocity of money is going to increase. The $10 trillion of new money the Fed created for Obama by buying bonds (Quantitative Easing) to keep interest rates down — inflation baked into the cake — will flood the marketplace. It will materialize as double digit price rises, then immediately in double digit interest rates, followed by widespread bankruptcies as the present value of financial paper sinks. A better bet than improving our infrastructure and rebuilding our military is that Trump will be supervising a few more multi-trillion-dollar federal bailouts, and another round of Nixonian price and wage controls.

    Which takes us back to the sub-theme of ignorance: The failure of DJT’s Presidency is baked into the cake, too, and it will land squarely in his lap. Carter all over again. The Dems ought to start grooming his replacement for 2020. The seat will be theirs for the taking.

    • Evolution is not something in which you believe any more than is gravity. It’s an observation, ie a scientific fact. In the 19th century, it was an insight supported by evidence, as was in the 16th century the theory or hypothesis that the earth orbits the sun while rotating on its axis, facts not directly observed until the 18th and 19th centuries. But in the 20th and 21st centuries evolution has been repeatedly observed and created in the wild and in labs.

      Natural selection is entirely natural, being a consequence of reproduction. So are all the other evolutionary processes.

    • Chimp, 11/10/16 at 6:23 pm:

      Evolution is not something in which you believe any more than is gravity. It’s an observation, ie a scientific fact. … Natural selection is entirely natural, being a consequence of reproduction. So are all the other evolutionary processes.

      The beliefs of a Chimp on evolution! How perfectly adorable.

      Much as Jello used to come in six delicious flavors, science and (biological) evolution each come in two. For the former, it’s Modern Science and its deconstruction, Post Modern Science. MS eschews belief; PMS doesn’t care.

      Humans are free to believe what they choose. They may be denied the right to express certain beliefs, as in totalitarian systems, including the milder form of political correctness, but denying them personal acceptance or rejection of MS, PMS, AGW, evolution, or religion as a belief is not physically possible.

      As to the facets of evolution, first is speciation, not fact, but a theory based on fact. Second, is natural selection, once a conjecture, now seen as outside science (MS only). Here’s a relevant post, which links to other posts and argument on the topic:

      Darwin’s Natural Selection … has the power to collect incremental changes to help life survive. It has the power of recognize the pattern of where life is going, and to give evolution direction. It has the power to coordinate mutations and adaptations into genetics. The answer is that Darwin’s Natural Selection does not fit the offered definition of science. There is an alternative, which I call Darwin 2.0.

      Google for it, Chimp. Darwin modeled natural selection after animal husbandry (see below), but not satisfied just to anthropomorphize it, he deified it. In the ensuing argument on the climate blogs, some expressed not just doubt, but denial that Darwin gave natural selection direction. They needed citations, though the effort was, of course, wasted on them. For those similarly disinclined actually to find citations, consider this sampler previously offered on Judith Curry’s blog:

      I attribute the passage of a variety, from a state in which it differs very slightly from its parent to one in which it differs more, to the action of natural selection in accumulating (as will hereafter be more fully explained) differences of structure in certain definite directions. Bold added, Darwin, Origin of the Species, p. 29.

      Not that, as I believe, any extreme amount of variability is necessary; as man can certainly produce great results by adding up in any given direction mere individual differences, so could Nature, but far more easily, from having incomparably longer time at her disposal. Id., p. 40

      Thus it will be in nature; for within a confined area, with some place in its polity not so perfectly occupied as might be, natural selection will always tend to preserve all the individuals varying in the right direction, though in different degrees, so as better to fill up the unoccupied place. Id. , p. 48.

      Therefore I can see no difficulty, under changing conditions of life, in natural selection accumulating slight modifications of instinct to any extent, in any useful direction. Id., p. 101.

      These properties of natural selection contain, for all to see, the essence of Darwin’s deification of evolutionary causation, his supernatural selection.

      • I think that there is evolution, and that we were dropped off here. There is also no reason to think that an alien race couldn’t tamper with the DNA. I clearly remember the incident of Betty and Barney Hill. No one on this planet had access to the technology to analysis DNA. And no one had even thought of amniotic synthesis. And there it was in complete detail .
        We do it with animals and plants. In fact the first manipulation of DNA occurred during early biblical times. And is so described in the literature.

  34. Does this mean there will be some review of grant applications in NSF funding for the psychological effects of climate change? Or EPA mining engineer misadventures? or NASA climate studies while we have to hitch rides on Russian rockets?

  35. Thank you for the comment about deniers. Anyone using the term is using it as a derogatory comparing skeptics to holocaust deniers. They try to waffle on what they mean, but the words speak for themselves, and the ones using them are demonstrating ignorance and bigotry.

  36. The Donald has a chance to earn the support of the disaffected, disenfranchised folks who voted for him. If he can do that we will be looking at a long line of Republican presidencies and majorities. If he disappoints them, they will abandon him.

    The Republican elite are just as toxic as the Democrat elite. If The Donald can find a way to rein them in he can go down as one of the great presidents. If he doesn’t, he could be ushered out after one term.

    • Big problem, hopefully, for the mainstream media. I hope they have been deflated. But I expect they will scream CO2 pollution, hatred of specific groups of people based on color and sex organs, more effort to divide people from one another other with strawman arguments.

    • What The Donald needs do is keep on, forcefully, telling the truth as he sees it. All this (rap about him moderating his tone is just that. People just want to be rid of the fake, poll-tested “public” positions.

      • Mr. Trump’s outrageous comments were deliberate.

        Because his attacks sucked up all the oxygen in the room. None of the other contestants had a chance to breathe and none ever got a chance to get out of the gate. link

        He got so much free publicity.

  37. On the the eve of destruction the climate fanatics and hustlers are panicked. Love it.

    DJT should coo sweetly while Myron Ebell sets about dismantling the EPA. Yes. Get rid of it and return its few required functions to other departments.

    May want to take the wood to the Interior Department where our park rangers are mired in a systematic sexual harassment scandal. To much time in remote areas alone I suppose. Oh but it doesn’t make much news when Smokey the Bear turns creepy.

    Whatever. Here’s a real chance to clean house.

  38. Important Question: Does anyone know why AZ and MI are not being counted as wins for Trump yet? Is this polictical so people do not realize by how much Trump won? I want to see this thing finalized, for fear that something is going to change, where they find some district forgot to count votes and Trump loses PA or something.

    • MI is really close; if the margin is less than 2000 votes, state law requires an automatic recount. The NY Times web site shows only 82% of the votes counted on AZ.

      • Thank you Ricdre: Google official results shows:
        MI, with 100% reporting: Trump up by 11,837
        AZ, with 100% reporting: Trump up by 84,526

        This has not changed in 24 hours

      • There may be an issue with counting absentee ballots. Those have to be opened and run through the machines by hand. If there were enough to potentially change the result, they wouldn’t report until all of them had been counted.

      • Stuff like that rarely makes it past local news organizations. Perhaps if you found the web sites for local broadcast and newspaper outfits.

      • I found that too… on election night… and the artical keeps updating its time stamp to make it seem like it’s news.

      • I’m hanging out for this too. I keep thinking it’s so Clinton shows a majority in popular votes, giving the MSM plenty to play with and her fans reason to get protesting, and that the popular vote leader will change once the rest has been announced.

        I’m probably wrong, but if Clinton had won, I don’t get the feeling there would be this delay in adding the numbers to the full total. The Dems would be singing and bragging and waving around the full score.

      • ..The Democrat poll workers are in too much shock to actually do their job…they didn’t quite have enough dead people to vote this time around and were too cheap to pay people to vote twice because they were so sure Crooked Hillary would win in a landslide !! ROTFLMAO….

  39. There is only one thing worse than bad public policy and that is globalized bad public policy. That is Obama.

  40. I will first congratulate the man who is elected as the president of the USA by the people, Mr. D. Trump, and wish him and the USA nation the very best outcome possible.

    I really wish and hope that all USA citizens and USA residents respect and honor their new elected President regardless of the ideology and political leanings or any other affiliated .self interest, as that will be the most productive and cost effective outcome, in my opinion.

    I am not a USA citizen, but never the less I recognize that USA IS AND HAS BEING THE MOST POWERFUL AND MOST CONTRIBUTING NATION to the civic way of life and civic liberties of our world lately, with all its successes and failures, if I could put it that way.

    In my understanding and opinion, Mr. D. Trump is going a be the first USA President with the most leverage of power ever than any other President before him, at least since the end of the W.W2, for not saying since the beginning of USA nation.

    In my opinion MR.D.Trump, as the president of USA can really count for a change, a meaningful one, as he will have the best opportunity given by power invested in him by the USA people and his nation at this moment in time

    If I could fancy and chance an advice to Honorable Mr. D. Trump, the president of USA, will be in the lines of,,,,,,,, please do not let this escape you….and for as long as you be certain and sure that you doing your best for the USA as a nation by protecting and shielding the USA constitution and working towards the best outcome for the well being of USA citizens and the building up of the political integrity of USA, people all over the world will look and seek guidance,. support, counting at and respect and honor USA and its contribution to the world and civility….. ,.

    Cheers

    • Your post warms my heart. I think it will be difficult to use the levers, but agree with you. Politicians are skilled at being corrupt, and they will fight him. They will use the media to support their efforts. This is going to be very interesting to watch play out. We need a strong president to make the changes stick. At the same time, the democrats have pandered to create a compliant left wing of the US populous.

      These left wingers are the opposite of a Kennedy Democrat. Recall Kennedy said: “ask not what your country can do for you — ask what you can do for your country”

      They instead subscribe to the perverse version “ask what your country can do for you — not what you can do for your country”

    • Good points
      In the reform of the early 1980s, Thatcher had a lot of power with her majority in the House of Commons. She had the freedom to move and she did.
      In Canada, PM Mulroney had an an stronger mandate to reform. Despite similar freedoms to act, he did not understand the global reform that even overwhelmed Communist police states. I still say he was a Liberal, not a Conservative.
      Reagan had the mandate and understood the reform movement but was constrained by Democrats controlling the House and Senate.
      Trump will have Congress with him. Once the RINOs get with the program.
      It is going to be exciting!

  41. Climate change is a huge and real problem, Trump and his supporters are blatantly wrong on the topic, and it’s obvious that climate change denial is purely politically motivated at the expense of the health and welfare of the whole planet…human health and environmental health. For you to say that “well clearly people thing climate change action is wrong”…those people are wrong. The public sphere has been filled with so much misinformation peddled by those with vested interests in making more money today at the expense of a sustainable future.

    You are one of the many people who are wrong, misinformed, and seem to think we can vote away climate change. Science is not democratic, it is reality, and just because most people are ignorant does not force reality to change.

    The original author you responded to is right on. You are totally off base.

    • If science is not democratic why do you guys keep insisting “consensus” is so important. In fact there are many scientists like myself who remain unconvinced that there is a problem. But our opinions don’t count because we are not officially “climate” scientists and we don’t publish papers in this area. I think I’m right though. I trust my own analysis of the issue far more that I trust some of the rubbish papers I’ve read in climate science.

      If you check the numbers (and I have) the immediate radiative greenhouse effect from CO2 causes only a minor and benign rise in temperature (depending on your assumptions) of around 1.3 degrees per doubling of CO2. To get anything catastrophic you have to propose large positive feedbacks which all the evidence so far shows simply do not exist; and you have to ignore many negative feedbacks which evidence seems to strongly support. In my opinion there is no problem here serious enough that we must wreck the world economy, subject ourselves to a dictatorial global government, and kill half a billion people (by locking them into energy poverty) in order to solve it.

      What we have now is an out of control political juggernaut initiated by some scientists who once cried wolf. Embarrassingly there turns out to be no wolf, but it is too late to call off the fanatical zealots currently conducting the wolfhunt. Anyone who tries to say there is no wolf gets attacked.

    • Climate change is not a huge or real problem, obama and his supporters are blatantly wrong on the topic, and it’s obvious that climate change propaganda is purely politically motivated at the expense of freedom and welfare of the whole planet… political and personal freedom. For you to say that “well clearly people thing climate change action is wrong”…those people are right. The public sphere has been filled with so much misinformation peddled by those with vested interests in making more money today at the expense of the taxpayers and wage earners of this country.

      You are one of the many people who are wrong, misinformed, and seem to think man can control climate change. Science is not democratic, and just because most people are ignorant does not force reality to change.

      The original author you responded to is wrong. You too are totally off base.

  42. A trillion dollar a year “industry” is going to be hard to dismantle and it is going to take time IF you go at it from the top down. But the fact that it IS (and I know what is, is) ALL about money, if President Trump (gosh that sounds good!) wants to quickly put an end to the most fraudulent activity the world has ever endured (and save billions toward the reduction of debt OR put it toward rebuilding our infrastructure) all he has to do is turn a few money spigots to off, not the least of which is the grant money valve, and the “industry” will wilt away to nothing. Sure, there will still be money from private sources, but if George Soros and his ilk want to keep perpetuating the hoax, the money will have to (and should) come out of their pockets, NOT the US tax payers! BTW, George and his kind are the biggest losers in what happened Tuesday and that is why they are surreptitiously “pushing” their sycophants out on to the streets in protest, while the visible, leftist elites like Obama and Hillary are NOW calling for cooperation and compromise. “Hey, were all on the same team.” Yeah, well watch your back, Donald.

  43. According to media reports in Germany (Der Spiegel http://www.spiegel.de/politik/…, DT has removed from his HP his pledge to revoke the “Paris Climate Agreement” and the pledge to stop muslim immigration.
    A list of possible candidates for Scotus is said to have vanished as well.
    Does he stop before even getting started?

  44. Best news I have ever experienced.

    The American people have seen the scam and have spoken.

    The biased media with their rigged polls have egg on their faces and the administration is no doubt facing a tremendous shake up.

    If only we could do this in my country!

    Cheers

    Roger
    http://www.thedemiseofchristchurch.com

  45. The problem with EPA and the Clean Power Plan is that all pollution is combined into CO2 as the most important pollution. CO2 is not pollution, and the other stuff coal plants emit is allready controlled and filtered out as best possible. I hope the real pollution will be still controlled to a normal safe level.
    The cooling water outlet need not be cleaner than the intake.

  46. The university campus Sustainistas are going ape over the election, reacting much like the foul-mouthed millennials marching the streets of the cities last night. But their savior Bill McKibben is holding a webinar on 11/16 help them lay out a plan to fight Trump. These Sustainistas, paid sustainability (aka climate activist) staff, inhabit many if not most colleges and universities in the U.S. They are the ones pushing Agenda 21, forcing it into higher ed curricula and propagandizing K-12 education.

    Their most active email thread in memory has been happening today under the subject: “What can we do post-election?” (and they don’t mean “How can we help Mr. Trump?) Here is the text of the lead email in the thread:

    “America, and the world we touch, has crossed overnight from an era of economic and political stability into a highly uncertain future. It is clear that much of the policy direction in support of sustainability that Washington has provided the past eight years will be reversed. This means that for the next few years, our proactive work will now be happening within state and local government, corporations, start-ups, NGO’s, educational institutions, and faith organizations— as it did from 2000-2008.

    Our work will not go away. In just the last three years, the planet has heated up almost a quarter of a degree. Meeting the needs of billions of more people all aspiring to a better quality of life demands that we still rewire the world with clean energy, still reinvent the global food system, still rebuild smart and inclusive cities, and fundamentally, put sustainability and sufficiency at the heart of what we are doing on the planet. This is a moment that calls on all of us to redouble our efforts to lead the change.”

    So much for “unifying” the country. In their eyes, they are right, Trump is wrong. (Unity is great just as long everyone agrees to their agenda and world view.)

  47. Dear Steve Keppel-Jones November 10, 2016 at 12:35 pm.”Send them to Australia”. I am afraid that people were only ”Sent to Australia” in convict ships many years ago. Now we have a points system that would exclude every single one of the people you wish to send to us. In fact many of our original convicts would qualify for entry under our present points system because they had marketable skills!

  48. I join with others in urging people to reign in expectations. Obama supporters went wild with that hopey changey thing when he was elected and given the Nobel peace prize just for showing up.

    It would be a mistake to do the same in reverse.

  49. So let’s be friends again
    I’m tired of feeling this way
    Let’s be friends again
    I can’t do it without you babe now
    Friends again
    Let’s be friends again

    • That was actually bloody brilliant – let’s hope no lefties watch it .
      And that ‘s from me – someone who thinks Trump is the next coming

    • He touched on, very briefly, that Trump was change and that’s what people voted for. But that is also what is causing this fear. Even our own Declaration of Independence acknowledges that people are more likely to suffer than to engage in change. People do not like change and Trump represents change. So let’s step back, take a deep breath and see how it all plays out.

  50. Borrow a Russian ice breaker from Russia put all the climate change believers on said ice breaker and have them do a four year on site study of anartic ice trends and report back in 4 years!

  51. When you examine “climate change” as defined by IPPC, Odama, EPA and all the bought and paid for “climate scientists, modelers, Hansenites and corrupt politicians” etc. I’m a climate change denier in the Trump camp and very proud of it I might add!

  52. I think the AGW scam will continue even with Trump. It will be a long haul, but massive majorities will only see it when they notice that the climate/weather ain’t changing probably another 20 years…. sorry people!

  53. Its the climate that decides (SUN) and its actually cooling but it will take many more years for people all over our planet to realize that humans have no influence except for urban island effect.

  54. ..Just think how many “poor” people would no longer be poor, if the money spent on this election cycle actually went to the “poor” people ? Almost 2 billion dollars to elect the next president…This must be corrected…

  55. Though the National Science Foundation was established at the time in 1958, it has subsequently become to be used to effect “national” policy by the President, a non-Scientist, with money that the Congress has little discretion of how and on what it be spent. That is a Constitutional Problem of First Order made evident by President Barak Hussein Obama and his Favorite John Paul Holdren, Ph.D. To restore order of the Constitution the National Science Foundation must be dis-established immediately on 20 January 2017 and the moneys returned to the Department of the Treasury.

  56. Have you guys looked at the Energy Section of Trumps website .
    scrapping anti-coal legislation , the EPA etc etc
    OMG – I have seriously died and gone to heaven .

    THANK YOU ALL PATRIOTS AND GOD BLESS YOU MR PRESIDENTELECT

  57. Pollution sucks. CO2 emissions suck. Earthquakes caused by fracking sucks. Impeachment is under way. Filibusters are coming like you have never seen before. Killers of people and nature destroyers are not patriots. Reading these comments I understand what Trump meant when he said he could start shooting people in the streets and people would still vote for him. You are all completely ignorant and crazy. Do any of you even have a high school diploma? What is the new Hitler’s plan? Accelerating climate change is just one of them. Starting wars, escalating racial tensions, targeting races and religions, pillaging and looting are also on his agenda. Dark times are coming folks.

  58. I’d like to see all the wasted climate change money spent on a nice boulevards to gas station/convenience store in as many inner city places as possible, then pricing the gasoline 25 cents below prevailing prices. If the indian casinos can have cheap gas (because of no federal tax I think) why not others. Drivers won’t be able to resist the cheap gasoline engine and will go out of their way to get it. Money flows in, people of different colors mingle, economic activity booms, all is good. All profits go to building whatever they want in the area.

  59. I made the mistake of ‘engaging’ a friend of a friend on FB yesterday. I simply put forth a few facts on CO2 and it’s benign-ness, how greenhouse growers pump the pollutant CO2 in at about 1200ppm etc.. and also the recent ice sheets covering North America, the rate of sea-level rise and that cheap, reliable energy is what makes life good for the human condition. I am an operational meteorologist and mentioned that fact to her and this was her response (apologies for the language);

    “Tom ____ You know what? F$@k you. You have just enough knowledge to be a weatherman on the radio (thanks, LinkedIn!) and think that qualifies you to say that the HUGE MAJORITY of actual climate scientists and serious meteorologists are full of shit and you and only people like you are right. You also blithely pooh-pooh, from the middle of the country where it makes no fucking difference to you, the possibility of coastal cities such as your friend Greg’s home literally DROWNING. “Nature boy,” my ass. FUCK OFF. Sorry, Greg.”

    They are coming unhinged and this made my day!

    • I don’t think it was a mistake. Call it quiet amusement, as you said to make your day. Perhaps she will jump off a cliff and the Earth will have one less person to use up it’s natural resources.

  60. To complete Trump’s science dream team, he should appoint:
    William Happer as Science Adviser
    Richard Lindzen as director of National Science Foundation
    Judith Curry as NOAA Administrator
    Roy Spencer as director of NASA GISS

  61. Redefining CO2 as a pollutant doesn’t make it so. I doubt that alarmists realize that and that is hilarious.

  62. I remember discussing and debating global warming in my university days. I’ve watched 35 years of exaggerations and failed predictions. At some point you have to say, “enough”.

Comments are closed.